About your Search

20121222
20121230
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6 (some duplicates have been removed)
look at the civil rights movement, that started with emmittville, montgomery. montgomery was supposed to be a boycott. people on the ground who begin to drive this issue. the conversation can't start in washington. washington is an aftereffect. it has to start with the people in various places driving them to move. if that doesn't happen, they will not move. >> you're absolutely right. that is the history of movements in america. but there is going to be a bill we know senator dianne feinstein is going to introduce a bill on the first day of the new congress. why shouldn't more folks get behind that, including some republicans? because i'd like to remind you of one thing. justice scalia said in the heller decision, like most rights the second amendment is not unlighted. -- not unlimited. he said, it is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever for whatever purpose. from the high priest of the supreme court of conservatism himself. why doesn't that create some room for current conservatives like ronald reagan did in 1994 to back an assault weapons ban
and christine gregoire from washington, why in. >> two governors leading an important new civil right struggle, the civil rights struggle of our generation, many feel as i do, and they helped spearhead the effort to gain marriage equality in their state, in washington state and maryland this year. they did it against the odds and knowing that there would be a referendum, a voter referendum if they pushed the legislatures into this and knowing also that marriage equality had never been approved in a voter referendum. they led that fight against the odds and as a result the citizens of their state are better off and have more fairness and more equality in their states this year. >> anna, you also chose a governor from your party as well, chris christie. >> dana, you know he was on the nice list when my democrat colleague and friend richard chose him on the nice list, too, so when richard and i are agreeing it tells you the man was nice. >> although i think chris christie could have been on my naughty list, too, ana. >> and i think he'd be happy with that, too. what chris christie did this year d
contributor and civil rights and law professor avery friedman. morning, avery. >> good morning, carol. >> i think the thing that stands out for most people is that this man was convicted of murder for killing his grandmother who was 92 years old. apparently he beat her to death and he was on parole. he only served 17 years. how is that possible? >> yeah, it seems impossible to happen. but if you study this, spengler was in his late 20s when he committed this murder. and one would expect that he would have spent the rest of his life in the new york penal system. the fact is, though, that he was paroled out and actually had an obligation to report to his parole officer until this happened. but the fact is that it struck me as virtually impossible for the parole department not to know that this guy was a problem. the fact that he committed this murder -- again, even though he was in his 20s, unless he was a model person in the penitentiary, it would seem pretty obvious that there was a problem with this guy and of course the worst happened here. and we will never know, although we do tend to t
disputes. things like the civil rights fights of the 1960s. now it is routine. it requires really 60 votes to do anything in the senate. we have this intense level of party line voting with the filibuster. it's like a parliament system without majority rule. then you have the informal analog to that in the house which the majority party says, we're not going to bring anything up. it has to have 218 votes but it has to have a majority of the majority which gives a veto to the republican wing of the conservative party. that's where we'restick stuck right now. >> let's bring in lisa dejardan. is there in this particular case -- >> reporter: i'm hesitant to get into it because it gets into senate procedure. the simplest would be if the leaders agree not to invoke that 60-vote requirement. if they agree a majority would be enough. for that to work, the rest of the senate would then have to essentially allow it to. there would have to be no one that attempts a filibuster. that's the easiest way to get around the 60 votes. another way is to possibly use some sort of budget measure that could be p
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6 (some duplicates have been removed)